Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Spare no expense.


Hmm. Would you ever pay $4500 for a jacket?

SHE would. Would you?

UPDATE:

While we are on the topic, HERE is a gread read from Cathy Horyn about the price of clothes. She mentions that one could be a college student and actually splurge on a YSL blouse back in the day without, it seems, needing to take out a loan for it. Hard to imagine those days ever existed.

17 comments:

Leah said...

$450, maybe -- if I absolutely loved it and knew I would have it forever.

But the arrogance required to assume that anything but .000001 percent of the Times' readers have that kind of cash to drop on one piece of clothing blows me away. For most of us, $4,500 is more than a month's salary, and is needed for things like putting a roof over our family's heads, food on the table, and oh, maybe silly little things like medical care.

So a $4,500 jacket? (Or, for that matter, a $10,000 couch.) Give me a fucking break.

Anonymous said...

Yes.

(I am curious about stuff that ISN'T part of my daily, limited world.)

franki durbin said...

no. easily no. I'd spend that much on three bags. but never a jacket. trends change way too frequently... and I think that's insane.

honestly, I'm not even proud that I'd spend that much on a few handbags...but that's the reality I've come to know.

Maria said...

Ever been drunk shopping and visited the Chanel section at Nordstrom? Well, that's really the only time I tried to justify a Chanel jacket.

Anonymous said...

Note to self: This Maria sounds like a hell of a lot of fun.

Anonymous said...

AC's "Go for Broke" column is genius--what a tragedy that there aren't more of them? And will SHE be the one splurging every time? Or will there be guest splurgers?

eM said...

HELL no

She Who Must Be Obeyed said...

Do I have to give up something to buy it? I remember Dr. Day in Ec 101 - the A you buy is the B you do without. So maybe I would; it's gd gorgeous. Sometimes you really do get what you pay for.

alis said...

No way. Even if we tend to think "it's a black jacket, I'll have it forever", some tiny detail changes over the seasons (length, arm length, collar, buttons, whatever) and the piece goes out of fashion. A bag you can use for years, but with jackets theres always the risk of pilling, staining, not fitting anymore etc. Btw I wouldn't pay that much for a bag either.

karina said...

No way!!!I woul prefer buy some art for my home.
I could not feel relaxed in such expensive jacket!

Anonymous said...

First off, I don't like that jacket. Sorry. Too boxy and short-waisted for a body like mine.

And no. I am lucky to have plenty of money. But there are things I feel good about spending lots of shekels on: traveling frequently (but always flying in Economy Cass), charity, eating out several times/ week, personal trainer, etc.

But clothing? For me, this jacket doesn't feel like a worthwhile use of that amount of money. I agree with the poster who wrote that somehow, 3 handbags would feel like it made slightly more sense...

Anonymous said...

No. I have spent nearly 1000 on coat once, and after several years I still have it. But with that much money I'd rather go on holiday. Even if I had the money do but those expensive clothes, I think I'd feel stupid. I mean there are people who spend several hundred (even 100$ seems like a lot to me) on t-shirts. T-SHIRTS!

I would on the other hand spend that much (or near that much) on really great furniture if I had the money, because a last that you will see and use every day. And good furniture lasts longer then clothes do.

ps: I think the jacket is kind of hideous. And most people wouldn't buy it but they do because it's suppose to be 'a classic'.
One classic I would splurge on is the Burberry coat, and that is only about 1'500$.

Anonymous said...

The way to rationalize this would be: If you bought it in your 20s or 30s, you would have to wear it at least 3 decades before that look would correspond to your actual age.

So the price per wear would definitely go down.

Anonymous said...

Grow up, Leah. There will always be the poor, and there will always be the rich. Seeing evidence of either will not singe your retinas.

Come on, you're not that frail.

Anonymous said...

No. But I spent that much on a bed (mattress and the bed itself.)

But that's HOURS and years of my life. I wouldn't wear this jacket enough to justify the price.

Decorno said...

Plus... when are people going to stop genuflecting to the designs of Chanel yesteryear and admit that this boxy jacket is unflattering for most and also looks geriatric?

Just sayin'.

Christine in DC said...

If the tag said "Wal-Mart" or something, people wouldn't like it at all. (But then I'd be more forgiving of its proportions).

Leah, I find that's a hallmark of the Times and of other papers, actually--a gross misunderstanding of how most people live. There's always all this talk about people prancing off to the Hamptons and whatnot. Clearly not on a journalist's salary, which leads me to think most of the writers have family money or something.